ML20058P142
| ML20058P142 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07000734 |
| Issue date: | 08/25/1993 |
| From: | Cillis M NRC |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9312230094 | |
| Download: ML20058P142 (8) | |
Text
,
TEL:
5ep 01 93
?:39 No.003 P.06 V $l3D dM
- ?,
1 Attachment EMPLOYEE CONCERNS PROGRAMS _
PLANT NAME: General Atomics LICENSEE: General Atomics DOCKET No:
70-734 NOTE:
Please circle yes or no if applicable and add comments in the space provided.
A.
PROGRAM:
1.
the licensee have an employee concerns program?
or No/ Comments)
The licensee has three different types of ECPs. They are as follows:
a.
" Instructions to Workers." training on NRC form-3 instructions b.
GA Employee Hotline c.
Employee Assistance Procram (EAP) 2.
Has NRC inspected this program? No Report # b'A B.
SCOPE:
(Circle all that apply) 1.
Is it for:
e Technical? h,h' Comments) a.
The EAP program is not desianed to address technical issues.
Jhe EAP is designed to mostly hendle personal issues such as an illness (e.g.,_ drug related, alcohol, emotional). relationship and other family problems, and financial and_ legal aid problems.
However, any technical issue that may be rai_ sed under this program programs would be referred to the 10 CFR Part 19.12 or the GA Employee Hotline programs.
Administrative? h h Comments) b.
The response to this cuestion would be the same as aiven in B.3.a. above, c.
Personnel issues?
(Yes,No/ Comments) 2.
it cover safety as well as non-safety issues?
No/ Comments) 9312230094 930825 h
ADDCK 0700 4
gDR
)
200033
't Ng\\
TEL:
Sep 01 93 7:.10 No.003'P.07 y:
2 3.
Is it designed for:
a.
Nuclear Safety? h h Comments)
The response to this cuestion would. the same as oiven under B.I.a and B.].b. above.
b.
Personal Safety?
No/ Comments) c.
P onnel issues - including union grievances?
Yes No/ Comments 4.
the program apply to all licensee employees?
Yes No/ Comments) ments)
Contractors only participate in the licensee's 10 CFR Part 19.12 ECP and the GA Employee Hotline proorams.
6.
Does the licensee require its contractors and their subs to have a.
similar gram?
(Yes g Comments'.
7.
Does the licensee conduct an exit interview upon terminating em oyees asking if they have any safety concerns?
Yes E No/ Comments)
C.
INDEPENDENCE:
1.
What is the title of the person in charge?
a.
10 CFR Part 19.12 - Manager, Licensino. Safety. and Nuclear rempliance b.
GA Employee Hotline - Vice President General Counsel and Secretary EAP - This procram is contracted through a private consultant.
c.
The consultants name is National Resource Consultants. Inc.
(NRC1).
Emergency assistance is available from NRCI to al1 General Atomics employees and their families, 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> a day.
2.
Who do they report to?
10 CFR Part 19.12. GA Employee Hotline program manaaers and NRCI would all report to the licensee's Administration Group Sr. Vice President F
w.
TEL:
SeP 01 93' 7:.41 No.003 P'08 3
3.
Are they independent of line management?
7.05 4.
Does the ECP use third party consultants?
The GA Employee Hotline and EAP may use third party consultants on an as needed basis.
Currently. the 10 CFR Part 19.12 procram does not provide this kind of service.
5.
How is a concern about a manager or vice president followed up?
No such concerns have been identified to date.
However, if such a concern were raised. it would be carefully reviewed and processed accordinoly (e.g.. case by case basis).
D.
RESOURCES:
1.
What is the size of the staff devoted to this program?
a.
10 CFR Part 19.12 - 2 staff members h
b.
GA Emplo' vee Hotline - 8 to 10 staff members Z
c.
EAP - at least two staff members j
2.
What are ECP staff qualifications (technical training, interviewing training, investigator training, other)?
E a.
10 CFR Part 19.12 - This_ ECP procram is administered by thc Health Physics trainino staff and concerns / issues _ raised are cenerally reviewed by professional level individuals (see item C.).a).
The licensee indicated that they-had not received a concern under this program for approximately three years.
b.
The present GA Employee Hotline program is coordinated by professional staff members who work in the licensee's Law and gontracts aroup - any concerns broucht to the attention of this aroup are referred to the licensee's oroanization havino the expertise to respond to the concern or issue that is raised.
No followup is performed by the Law and Contracts aroup to determine if the concerns or issues that are raise cet resolved.
c.
EAP - is administered by a fully trained professionals who are certified by the State.
i e-.
TEL: ~
.Sep 01 93.~
7: 41 No.003 P 09?'~
5 t
4 i
E.
REFERRALS:
.3 1.
Who' has followup 'on concerns (ECP staff, line management, other)?
It should be noted that the Law and Contract aroup do not record or.-
]
maintain a record of calls tlat are received by way of the GA Employee Hotline. The person receivino calls made by way of the i
iotline assions followun action to tle group that would most likelv be able to resolve the concern that'is raised.
No-further action is-
.taken )y this aroup to determine the status of the concern or to verify if any followun actions are taken to resolve the concern. '
For-10 CFR 19.12, followun items would come under the responsibility of the Licensina. Safety. and Nuclear Compliance l
Manaoer or his delecate.
Followup actions under the EAP proaram is 1
cenerally assioned to the counselor reviewino the case.
F.
CONFIDENTIALITY:
i 1.
the ports confidential?
Yes E No Comments) l a.
10 CFR Part 19.12 - Only if concerns-are reported directly to!'
l the NRC in accordance with NRC Form 3 instructions.
b.
GA Emoloyee Hotline - Yes,-if it is reouested.
c.
EAP - Yes. if it is requested.
't 2.
Who is the identity of the alleger made known to (senior management, ECP staff, line management, other)?
l a.
10 CFR 19.12 - Senior management' b.
GA Employee Notline - The procram Administrator and the aroup l
assioned followup responsibility if confidentiality is not reouested.
c.
Can employees be:
[
a.
Anonymous?
No/ Comments) b..
Report by phone? hNo/ Comments) l l
'l m -
a
TEL:
5ep 01 93 7 U12 No.003 P.10 i
r 5
G.
FEEDBACK:
1.
I eedback given to the alleger upon completion of the followup?
es or No - If so, how?)
Directly or indirectly: such as, b_y verbal discussion or by postina_
information on a bulletin board or providing the information in a newsletter._
2.
Does the program reward good ideas?
Yes - this would be decided on a case by case basis.
i 3.
Who, or at what level, makes the final decision of resolution?
a.
10 CFR Part 19.12 - As a minimum, the procram administrator..
b.
GA Employee Hotline - The croup manager assioned responsibility for followup action.
c.
EAP - Generally this would be the_ responsibility of the assioned counselor: however, it could vary, dependino on the nature of the concern or problem.
4.
Are the resolutions of anonymous concerns disseminated?
r-Yes - they would be processed as indicated in Item G.I. above.
5.
Are resolutions of valid concerns publicized (newsletter, bulletin board, all hands meeting, other)?
Yes - they would be processed as indicated in Items G.1 and G.4 above.
H.
EFFECTIVENESS:
1.
How does the licensee mea *ure the effectiveness of the program?
The licensee has not officially measured the effectiveness of the 10 CFR Part 19.12 and GA Employee Hotline procrams because no formal method has been established for trackina three types of concerns and because of the small numbers of concerns that are raised.
However.
the licensee's staff does maintain an awareness of the concerns that are raised under these ECP's and therefore are able to determine its effectiveness in this manner.
TheTEAP performs all kinds of statistical analysis and trendino to determine the effectiveness of the program.
TEL:
Sep 01 93 7:42 No.003 P.11' O.
d 6
2.
Are concerns:
a.
Trended?
(Yes or No/ Comments)
Not formal 1Y {see item H.l. above) b.
Used? (Yes or No/ Comments)
Yes, on an as needed basis.
3.
In the last three years how many concerns were raised?
Of the concerns raised, how many were closed?
What percentage were substantiated? *
- L-No data was available for the 10 CFR Part 19.12 and GA Employee Hotline orograms.
The EAP program does maintain such data, however, all of it would apply to non-nuclear issues.
4.
How are followup techniques used to measure effectiveness (random '
survey, interviews,other)?
Through interviews for the EAP.
Not performed for the other two proQrams._
5.
How frequently are internal audits of the ECP conducted and by whom?
Ihe licensee has not established a formal audit program because of the small numbers of concerns that are raised throuch the 10 CFR Part 19.12 and the GA EmDloyee Hotline DroQrams.
1- '
NRCl staff members do perform periodic evaluations of the EAP.
l.
ADMINISTRATION / TRAINING:
1.
Is ECP prescribed by a procedure? (Yes or No/ Comments) a.
10 CFR 19.12'- Yes b.
No formal orocedures have been established for the remaining two Drearams: however, all of the programs are covered by 3pproved written documents and contracts.
2.
How are employees, as well as contractors, made aware of this program (training, newsletter, bulletin board, other)?
30 CFR 19.12 - All employee's and contractors are trained a.
annually.
Additionally.
NRC Form 3's and other information related to this program are nosted on bulletin boards, b.
GA Employee Hotline - Through publications in the licensee's telephone directory. periodic publications in the licensee's news letter dated April 1989 and November 1990, licensee e
G
TEL:
Sep 01 93 7:43 No.003 P.12 7
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
(Including characteristics which make the program especially effective, if any.)
Workers were interviewed durino the inspection for the purpose of determining if they were aware of which procrams were available for raisino cenerally any type of concern (e.g., s a fety, technical personal matters, design issues, radiological, etc.). All workers were aware of reporting concerns to the NRC using the cuidelines on NRC Form-3 (e.g., 10 CFR Part 19.12).
Most workers were not familiar with the EAP program. The few individuals who were aware (less than 2%) of this program felt it could only be used for addressino personal matters.
Less than 1% of the workers questioned were familiar with the GA Employee Hotline program.
The individuals that were aware of this procram also _ felt that the procram could only be used for addressino personal matters.
This observation was brought to_the licensee's attention.
NAME:
TITLE:
PHONE #:
Mike Cillis /Sr. Radiation Specialis,t /(510) 975-0228 Date Completed: 8/25/93 4
TEL:
~SeP 01 93'-
7:43'No.003 P.13.
n.
8 I
l f
2500/028 Attachment Issue Date 07/29/93 i
I i
sw-'
t
't
'f l
i F.
L E
f 1
h t
i e
h i
f O
TEL:
Sep-Gj'93 7:
2 57 No.uu3 P.U2 UNITED STATES d
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I
}
REGION V g
14so MAHIA LANE l
g+
WALNUT CREEK, CALIFORNIA 94596 5368
{
4 AUG s1 tggy Docket No.70-734 License No. $NM-696 General Atomics P. O. Box 85608 San Diego, California 92186-9784 Attention:
Mr.'R'. N. Rademacher Vice President, Human Resources
Subject:
NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 70-734/93-05.
This letter refers to the special inspection conducted by Mr. Michael tillis of, this office on August 16, 1993, of activities authorized by NRC License No.
SNM-696, and to the discussions of our findings held by Mr-C1111s with Ms. L, Quintana at the' conclusion of the inspection.~ -
Areas examined'during this inspection are described in the enclosed inspection i
report. -Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of ' procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and observations by the inspectors.
.T.
No deviations or violations of NRC requirements were found within the scope of this inspection.
In accordance with 10-CFR 2.790(a), a copy of this letter and the enclosure will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we'will. be glad to discuss them with you.
Si < erely, J
eese, C! jef.
a lities Radiolbgical Protection Branch
Enclosure:
Inspection Report 70-734/93-05
Attachment:
Temporary Instruction 2500/028 Questionnaire M Z M h 2 9 /) / (/ y/
n
< ~
j j
(
w PJ
TEL:
5ep 01 93-7:38 no 003 N O3-e' cc.w/ enclosure:.
Dr..K. E.-Asmussen, Manager Licensing, Safety and Nuclear Compliance B. Kapel, State of California, Department of Health Services-State of California b
i i
t
'.i.
+
N
.k
,E
' i i
1 i
i i
I.j 1
~
n.
TEL:
.Sep 01;93 7 :38 No.003 P.04 ' '
r.,
e
-l U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1
REGION V Report No.:
70-734/93-05 Docket No.:
70-734 I
f License No.:
SNM-696 Licensee:
General Atomics (GA)
P. O. Box 85608.
San Diego, California 92138 Facility Name:
Torrey Pines Mesa and Sorrento Valley Sites Inspection at:
San Diego, California j
Inspection conducte : August 16, 1993 j
7.M 3
Inspectors:
Milfe illis, Sen W Radiation Specialist Date Signe'd' Approved by:
/MAiWL '
A~
8[T//93 JamesUi. Reese, Chivf Date Signed -
(
Facilities Radiological Protection Branch Summarv:
Areas Inspected:.This was a special announced inspection to obtain information on the licensee's employee concerns program. Temporary Instruction 2500/028was addressed.
Results: In the area inspected, the licensee's programs appeared fully capable ll
- of accomplishing of their safety objectives.
No violations or deviations were:
identified.
l
'l 3 s i n g y/ O, Jg -
c tJu/L r.
TEL:
Sep 01 93-
-7:39 No.003 P.05 p'
A DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted a.
Licensee
- L. R. Quitana, Manager, Health Physics (HP)
W. Gilinsky, Manager, Employee Relttions R. Clark, Manager Contracts P. R. Maschka, Health Physics Supervisor, Decommissioning Activities b.
National Resource Consultants. Inc.
N. Krnich, Counselor
- Denotes those individuals attending the exit interview on August 16, 1993.
In addition to the individuals noted above, the inspectors met and held discussions with other members of the licensee's and contractor's staff's.
2.
Employee Concerns Proaram (TI 2500/028)
The inspector interviewed licensee managers' concerning the content of their employee concerns program (ECP).
The questionnaire provided in Temporary Instruction 2500/028 was completed during the interview and the inspector intervic.,cd workers for the. purpose of determining their awareness of licensee ECPs that are available for expressing their concerns.
The completed questionnaire is included as an attachment to this inspection report.
No violations or deviations were identified.
3.
Exit Interview (T! 2500/028)
[
The inspector met with the licensee representatives, denoted in Section 1, at the conclusion of the inspection on August 16, 1993.
The scope and findings of the inspection were summarized.
The licensee was informed -
that no violations or daviations were identified.
k i
i i
e 3
ATTACH 5fENT A ENfPLOYEE CONCERNS PROGRANTS PLANT NAME: R. E. Ginna LICENSEE: Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation DOCKET #: 50-309 NOTE:
Please circle yes or no if applicable and add comments in the space provided.
A.
PROGRAM:
1.
Does the licensee have an employee concems program? (Yes er No/ Comments)
Yes. An Open Door Policy is the primary means of communicating concerns to management. A confidential program (the Gateway program) and a superintendent's hotline are in place; but are not publicized and are essentially inactive.
2.
Has NRC inspected the program? Report No. 93-16. No, but 9316 will capture TI 2500/028 effort.
B.
SCOPE: (Circle all that apply) 1.
Is it for:
a.
Technical? (Yes, No/ Comments) Yes. In addition to an Open Door Policy, the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) and Potential Conditions Adverse to Quality (PCAQ) are mechanisms to address' technical concerns.
b.
Administrative? (Yes, No/ Comments) Yes. EAP - through referral.
i c.
Personnel issues? (Yes, No/ Comments) Yes. EAP - through referral.
2.
Does it cover safety as well as non-safety issues? (Yes or No/ Comments) Yes 3.
Is it designed for:
a.
Nuclear safety? (Yes, No/ Comments) Yes.
Not specincally but concerns can be referred to responsible departments.
i b.
Personal safety? (Yes, No/ Comments) Yes. Director contact with safety coordinators. EAP - through referral.
Issue Date: 07/29/93 A-1 2500/028 Attachment
s-t c
Personnel issues - including union grievances? (Yes g No/ Comments)
Yes. The absence of a union has fostered a teamwork approach to resolving differences.
)
4 Does the program apply to all licensee employees? (Yes g No/ Comments) Yes 5.
Contractors? (Yes g No/ Comments) Yes 6.
Does the licensee require its contractors and their subs to have a similar program?
(Yes E No' Comments) Yes. Through contractual agreements in the ama of industrial safety concerns.
7.
Does the licensee conduct an exit interview upon terminating employees asking if they have any safety concerns? (Yes n No/ Comments) Yes C.
INDEPENDENCE:
1.
What is the title of the person in charge? Site Gateway Coordinator reports to Corporate Director of Compensation Administration.
2.
Who do they report to? Director of Employee Relations.
3.
Are they independent of line management? Yes 4.
Does the ECP use third party consultants? On a limited basis. Wm. Mercer and Company has conducted an independent employee opinion survey.
5.
How is a concern about a manager or vice president followed up? No formalized i
mechanism.
D.
RESOURCES:
1.
What is the size of the staff devoted to this program? 3, but ECP is a collateral duty.
2.
What are ECP staff qualifications (technical training, interviewing training, investigator training, other)? None spectric. Short term In-house courses have been provided on supervisory skills; e.g., interviewing skills.
E.
REFERRALS:
1.
Who has followup on concems (ECP staff line management, other)? Plant Referral to the cognizant departnent and responsible manager.
Issue Date: 07/29/93 A-2 2500/028 Attachment c
F.
CONFIDENTIALITY:
1.
Are the reports confidential? O'es a No/ Comments) Yes 2.
Who is the identity of the alleger made known to (senior management ECP staff.
line management, other)? (Circle, if other explain) He can remain anonymous or be known to any or all of the above.
j 3.
Can employees be:
i Anonymous? (Yes, No/ Comments) Yes a.
b.
Report by phone? (Yes, No/ Comments) No. Superintendent's Hotline no longer works.
G.
FEEDBACK:
1.
Is feedback given to the alleger upon completion of the followup? (Yes g No -
If so, how?) Yes. A confidential answer can be mailed to their home or a personal meeting can be arranged with management.
2.
Does program reward good ideas? Yes. Employee Suggestion Box is a i
separate mechanism.
i 3.
Who, or at what level, makes the final decision of resolution? Based on the nature of the concern, at the appropriate management level, normally the Plant Manager.
4.
Are the resolutions of anonymous concerns disseminated? Yes i
5.
Are resolutions of valid concerns publicized (newsletter, bulletin board, all hands meeting, other)? All of the above.
t H.
EFFECTIVENESS:
1.
How does the licensee measure the effectiveness of the program? By the frequency of recurrence of the same issue.
2.
Are concerns:
- l a.
Trended? 0'es g No/ Comments) No b.
Used? (Yes or No/ Comments) Yes i
Issue Date: 07/24/93 A-3 2500/028 Attachment I
l
c
?
3.
In the last three years how many concerns were raised? Of the concerns raised.
how many were closed? What percentage were substar.tiated? This information was not readily available.
4.
How are followup techniques used to measure effectiveness (random survey, interviews, other)? An independent Employee Opinion Survey was conducted -
to identify management areas of concern.
5.
How frequently are internal cudits of the ECP conducted cnd by whom? None perfonned.
I.
ADMINISTRATION / TRAINING:
1.
Is ECP prescribed by a procedure? (Yes er No/ Comments) No 2.
How are employce::, as well as contractors, made aware of this program (training, newsletter, bulletin board, other)? General Employee Training and RG&E Employee Handbook.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
(Including characteristics which make the program especially effective, if any.)
Overall, the Gateway (confidential) program and Superintendent's Hotline have fallen into disuse. Workers are generally unaware of their existence. Reporting forms are not readily available, telephone hotline numbers are not answered, and a sampling of the work force indicated that the Open Door Policy is the most effective approach. Workers feel that they can freely communicate concerns to all levels of managemer.t.
As a result of the recent Employee Opinion Survey, RG&E management is implementing several initiatives including: eliminating the Gateway Program, establishing a new hotline I
program, scheduling Senior Management / Worker Breakfast Meetings, and fonnalizing Senior Management Plant Tour Procedures.
NAME:
TITLE:
PHONE #:
Tom Mostak SRI 315-524-6935 9/10/93 Issue Date: 07/29/93 A-4 2500/028 Attachment
+W